184. Telegram From the Mission at Geneva to the Department of State1
4619. Subject: (C) Human Rights Commission—35th Session Wrap-up.
1. (C—Entire text).
2. Summary: In comparison with sessions of the past few years, this session was more confrontational and political, but it must be judged against the background of unsettling events occurring simultaneously in the Middle East, Southeast Asia and Southern Africa. The Arab group became more militant, the Non-Aligned wanted to avoid an airing of the Southeast Asian situation, and the Africans remained silent as one of their worst human rights violators, Uganda, was invaded by a neighbor. From our perspective, a larger number of cases were handled under the confidential 1503 procedures, with Equatorial Guinea later being discussed publicly. Progress was made on the drafting of legal instruments such as the torture convention, draft declaration on religious intolerance, and a good airing by many countries of the Genocide Report took place. Helsinki monitors were specifically mentioned by name, and countries were encouraged to set up national institutions dealing with human rights. Negative aspects of the Commission’s work were the sad spectacle of cutting off debate on flagrant human rights violations in Cambodia, and the disheartening failure that no action was taken on missing persons and on the mass exodus of refugees. The consideration of overall analysis of human rights in the UN system led to adoption of a text which will hopefully strengthen the UN human rights sector and promote the objectives as the establishment of the post of High Commissioner. End summary.
3. General overview: The first two weeks of the Commission session saw more aggressive actions by Arab members on Middle East issues than in the past and a less polemical treatment of Southern Africa issues. In the succeeding three weeks the atmosphere heated up considerably as the Commission went into confidential session to deal with violations in individual countries under the 1503 procedures. The confidential sessions were followed by a final week of widespread name calling as most of the political conflicts of the moment, and some from the past, were aired and reflected in resolutions. At mid-session the Latin states seemed to be suffering the heaviest criticism and were [Page 578] the object of the majority of resolutions, mainly produced by Cuba. The Latin group, however, eventually began to assert itself and became active in protecting its own. Treatment of human rights cases under 1503 produced some progress on several cases and at least one precedent setting action, the decision to remove the case of Equatorial Guinea from the confidential proceedings and deal with it in public session.
4. The Commission made progress on the drafting of the legal instruments on torture and began unenthusiastically to work on a convention on the rights of the child. The West achieved some satisfaction on the drafting of a declaration on religious intolerance by forcing to a vote over strong Soviet objections the texts of the first three articles. And the Commission’s consideration of economic, social and cultural rights centered on a discussion of the right to development, a concept which the Commission referred to governments for further comment. The majority of Western, and some developing countries such as Brazil expressed uncertainty over the need to establish new “rights” but indicated they were prepared to take constructive approach. Resolutions on the overall analysis of human rights in the UN, national institutions, and the Human Rights Yearbook were also adopted.
5. One of the most frustrating aspects of the session was the failure of the Commission to take any action on Cambodia. The procedural maneuvers of this issue left everyone a loser. The Non-Aligned pushed through a motion to adjourn debate and take no action concerning the report on Cambodia, even before the debate had begun. The West objected vehemently to this move, but were overruled at the time. This imposition of a gag rule made some delegates from all groups uneasy. The silencing of the debate proved shortlived. The Chairman later allowed the representatives from Democratic Kampuchea, China, and Vietnam to speak, thus opening the way for a full exchange of insults among those three plus the USSR, Mongolia and Bulgaria. Two additional disappointments were: (1) the failure of the Canadian initiative on the causes of mass exodus, which was withdrawn in order to prevent it from being distorted with Syrian amendments, focussing the resolution on the Palestinian question, and (2) the initiative on disappeared persons which was deferred until next year. The Canadians decided to opt for deferral rather than accept a watered down result.
6. The discussion of the Report on Genocide involved the participation of a significant number of delegations speaking out in support of the original par. 30 relating to Armenian massacres.2 The decision ended with a statement by the Chairman of the HRC endorsing our ob[Page 579]jective of securing a reexamination by the Special Rapporteur of his omission of para. 30.3
7. Political climate: A mood of political confrontation took root early in the session as the Arab group ran rough-shod over the procedures during the first day of debate on the question of the occupied territories by pushing to a vote a telegram directed against the Government of Israel. This was in spite of objections by Western and even some Latin delegates that they had not had time to consider the text. In the third week of the session as the confidential meetings on the particular countries got under way, political hostilities greatly increased. The Latin group felt suddenly betrayed and became temporarily traumatized at what they considered the failure of other groups, particularly the African group, to implement the same standards of objectivity and universality which certain Latin delegations were trying to employ. The Ambassador of Colombia openly expressed his disgust with the African delegation and the socialist bloc countries for protecting their own region and their own political self-interests, thereby preventing strong action in the case of Ethiopia, all the while pretending to take an objective stand and support firm action against Paraguay and Uruguay. In response to what he considered the double-standard, the Colombian Ambassador announced that he would no longer serve as a member of working group on communications. At the same time, the Cubans were tabling drafts for public debate on the case of Nicaragua and Guatemala, further convincing the Latins that they were the only vulnerable group for attack. Some Latins complained to us that the African group lines up with the socialist bloc for self protection against Western demands for investigation of cases such as Ethiopia while the Latins are left with no protector. However, the Latins, led by Panama, Colombia and Peru, eventually became more active and achieved what they considered more balanced results on Latin country cases. The case of Argentina is somewhat different as they continue to succeed in preventing action on violations, by seeking the help of the most hardline, non-aligned countries. The Argentine counter-amendments on disappeared persons included Algeria, Iraq, Syria and Yugoslavia as co-sponsors.
8. The highly politicized atmosphere of this session resulted in the Commission moving away from exclusive consideration of Chile, [Page 580] South Africa and Israel. As previously noted, the US brought up specific cases in the Soviet Union and elsewhere, as well as mentioned problems in other parts of the world. The US was in turn criticized for our treatment of the American Indians.
9. With the present atmosphere fostering political comfrontation and with the Economic and Social Council likely to expand the Commission from 32 to 43 members, we should begin early charting our course and adapting our style accordingly.
- Source: Department of State, Bureau of Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs, 1979 Human Rights Subject Files, Lot 82D102, PORG 1979 35th UNHCR. Confidential; Immediate. Repeated for information to USUN.↩
- See footnotes 3 and 4, Document 182. In telegram 4442 from Geneva, March 14, the Mission indicated that Mezvinsky had spoken in favor of the reinstatement of paragraph 30. (National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy File, D790118–0129)↩
- In telegram 5694 from Geneva, April 3, the Mission reported that Van Boven had sent a letter to the Special Rapporteur, asking him to reinsert the text of paragraph 30. (National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy File, D790153–0262) Telegram 9134 from Geneva, May 30, noted that Van Boven had yet to receive any response from the Special Rapporteur, despite the fact that Van Boven had sent two additional letters requesting that the Rapporteur review the Genocide Report. (National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy File, D790247–1117)↩